• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ohio House bill would ban abortions spurred by diagnosis of Down syndrome

do you know why murder is illegal beyond it being malum per se?

Because it violates the natural human right to life.

because if SOCIETY does not punish murder, anarchy will result.

**** society. Our rights are individual.

If someone were to kill my son or wife or brother and society does NOTHING to punish the murderer, I am going to spent the rest of my days on earth doing every thing possible to kill everyone who was responsible for said killing. and I suspect that the survivors of my wrath would probably try to do the same to me and so on and so on

So what you're saying is that in order to be satisfied that it should be illegal, we need fathers of aborted kids to hunt down their kids' killers?

Well, I guess that makes some kind of perverse sense, but I'd rather just have justice instead of vigilantism or revenge.

so by having recourse to the criminal justice system, the desire for personal vengeance is mostly alleviated as people who have seen loved ones murdered defer to the state to punish the bastards who killed a family member or close friend

no such impetus exists for an abortion.

By this standard, a homeless man with no family or friends is completely acceptable to murder.

But this is not the standard - we are all created equal and we all possess the same unalienable right to life. It is just as wrong to kill the well-connected with folks who will miss them as it is to kill someone who is all alone in the world.
 
You seem to be taking huge offense to what I said.

Please tell me why you would willing have a baby that you knew in the early stages would have a severe disability and you would spend the rest of your life taking care of to the exclusion of everything else you should be doing.

Cause that's my ****ing kid and I created him and I have an obligation as a parent to take care of him, not just kill him like a ****ing psychopathic eugenicist.

Does that answer your question?
 
Because it violates the natural human right to life.



**** society. Our rights are individual.



So what you're saying is that in order to be satisfied that it should be illegal, we need fathers of aborted kids to hunt down their kids' killers?

Well, I guess that makes some kind of perverse sense, but I'd rather just have justice instead of vigilantism or revenge.



By this standard, a homeless man with no family or friends is completely acceptable to murder.

But this is not the standard - we are all created equal and we all possess the same unalienable right to life. It is just as wrong to kill the well-connected with folks who will miss them as it is to kill someone who is all alone in the world.

anti abortion positions are usually based on emotion, often involve men who are upset that they cannot control women or are formed by archaic and outdated religious views which are harmful to society. and society is in no way better off arresting a woman for aborting the fetus within her and punishing the doctor
 
A newborn can't reason and has no means to enforce his or her rights. He or she still has them recognized by law.



a) I don't believe in any deity.

b) The current ability to reason is not the standard for legal rights... or there would be plenty of posters on this site who are presumably adult humans but would have no rights... snark aside, that also means someone in a coma, medically induced or otherwise, or even just asleep would have no rights.

The ability to physically defend yourself is not the standard for legal rights. Might does NOT make right.

Furthermore, legal rights are subjective / political, which means they are entirely mutable - you cannot justify not providing them to some humans just by virtue of asserting that you are not and don't want to.

1) if you are consistent you have to oppose all abortion because the fetus is not responsible for how it was conceived

2) if however, you are consistent, you are forced to support abominations like opposing abortion in cases of rape, incest, or the imminent death of the mother

which is a losing proposition.

3) and you have to tell us how society is better off jailing mothers who have abortions

I can see why women get so militant when they hear men telling them that abortion ought to be banned. Its a moronic position that only hurts society
 
1) if you are consistent you have to oppose all abortion because the fetus is not responsible for how it was conceived

2) if however, you are consistent, you are forced to support abominations like opposing abortion in cases of rape, incest, or the imminent death of the mother

which is a losing proposition.

3) and you have to tell us how society is better off jailing mothers who have abortions

I can see why women get so militant when they hear men telling them that abortion ought to be banned. Its a moronic position that only hurts society

A warrior not just for guns eh? :D
 
Not imo. Get back to me when it's at least 50/50.

So, if you had an AIDS medicine that cured 23% of the people infected would you let people die as you hold out for a 50/50 cure?
 
You seem to be taking huge offense to what I said.

Please tell me why you would willing have a baby that you knew in the early stages would have a severe disability and you would spend the rest of your life taking care of to the exclusion of everything else you should be doing.

If you aren't ready to parent a child with special needs, that's fine. If you believe that services are not available for you, ok. But don't call look at them as a waste of life and resources.

That varied per child as was already said many times. Some need more aid than others. Likewise, there are services available. Furthermore, I already have that prospect with my own sibling, and it's not to the exclusion of everything else. His life is certainly worth living even if I will be his guardian. My family is what I should be doing.
 
This bill is a really sad attempt at controlling women.

If you look at the 2013 Arizonia link I posted there were 13,254 elective abortions in the state.
213 were because of medical reasons ( both maternal and fetal ) page 23.

Page 25 lists fetal medical reasons.
3 types of chromosome abnormalities are listed together.
Aneuploidy/Trisomy/Triploidy

Generally, aneuploidy is recognized as a small deviation from euploidy for the simple reason that major deviations are rarely compatible with survival, and such individuals usually die prenatally.
...
Trisomy is having three chromosomes of a particular type. A common autosomal trisomy in humans in Down syndrome, or trisomy 21, in which a person has three instead of the normal two chromosome 21s. Trisomy is a specific instance of polysomy, a more general term that indicates having more than two of any given chromosome.

Another type of aneuploidy is triploidy. A triploid individual has three of every chromosome, that is, three haploid sets of chromosomes. A triploid human would have 69 chromosomes (3 haploid sets of 23), a triploid dog 117 chromosomes. Production of triploids seems to be relatively common and can occur by, for example, fertilization by two sperm. However, birth of a live triploid is extraordinarily rare and such individuals are quite abnormal. The rare triploid that survives for more than a few hours after birth is almost certainly a mosaic, having a large proportion of diploid cells.

http://arbl.cvmbs.colostate.edu/hbooks/genetics/medgen/chromo/aneuploidy.html

Down syndrome falls under one of the abnormalities.

There were a total of 17 abortions in 2013 in Arizonia that took place under the
3 abnormalities posted.
Page 25 of link.

http://www.azdhs.gov/diro/reports/pdf/2013-arizona-abortion-report.pdf
 
Last edited:
I don't really find this to be a reasonable legal restriction on abortion...but I do find the given rationale of aborting a downs baby to be particularly morally repugnant.
 
Cause that's my ****ing kid and I created him and I have an obligation as a parent to take care of him, not just kill him like a ****ing psychopathic eugenicist.

Does that answer your question?

Not at all. You can look at things any way you want.
 
If you aren't ready to parent a child with special needs, that's fine. If you believe that services are not available for you, ok. But don't call look at them as a waste of life and resources.

That varied per child as was already said many times. Some need more aid than others. Likewise, there are services available. Furthermore, I already have that prospect with my own sibling, and it's not to the exclusion of everything else. His life is certainly worth living even if I will be his guardian. My family is what I should be doing.

I understand you have a personal stake in this conversation because of your sibling.

My question was why would anybody knowingly bring a disabled child into the world. It is hard enough to raise healthy children let alone one that requires 24 hour special care.

What happens if the family dies and that child is left alone?
 
I support freedom. Period

Evidently, only if it conforms to your very narrow viewpoint. I am still kinda shocked that you, of all people, hold such a subjective view of "freedom". Oh well, I guess you learn something new every day. :shrug:
 
If you disagree with government entitlements, fine. I'm probably with you on that one. But they are human beings, and government largess aside, they have as much right to live as you or I do.
A person only has the rights for which he can supply violence to defend. A fetus cannot supply any violence at all, and so a fetus has no rights.

But Roe v. Wade was about a man's right to perform medicine, not a woman's right to abort. You have to read the fine print.
 
I understand you have a personal stake in this conversation because of your sibling.

My question was why would anybody knowingly bring a disabled child into the world. It is hard enough to raise healthy children let alone one that requires 24 hour special care.

What happens if the family dies and that child is left alone?

Coming from someone that grew up with not only my family having care of persons with disabilities, but a ton of families, this strikes me as being victim to not grasping that it's still a family life. I have a disability, so does my brother, so did the kids I grew up with, and so do the kids I help.

There are challenges but they are unique to the kid's needs. I'm doing very worthwhile work, stuff that few have ever considered doing, I'm happy. I think my life is worth living. My brother feels the same way about his. The kids I know feel the same way.

It's life. It always felt awkward trying to explain to someone else that my life or my brother's life wasn't so tragic so as to merit not ever have been experienced. That's mostly the non-disabled's twisted view of things.

If the person needs additional care, you plan for different situations. If my parents died young, we were to go with our Aunt. When I o became old enough, my sister and I entered the phase we are in now. When my folks pass on, we get him. We are certainly nervous about making the right calls for him, but we think of him as a centerpiece in our lives. He doesn't add a burden to us. He's our brother. He's a good guy, he does his job well, he makes everyone laugh. He just wants to live how he wants to. It's not a crime....some abhorrent thought.

A kid with Down Syndrome in our community is hopefully going to be a local business owner. Another is very active in the community.

It's life.
 
Last edited:
Evidently, only if it conforms to your very narrow viewpoint. I am still kinda shocked that you, of all people, hold such a subjective view of "freedom". Oh well, I guess you learn something new every day. :shrug:

Oh I totally support freedom and I oppose laws that don't help society

remind me how putting the mother of an aborted fetus in prison or forcing women into back alley abortions is good for society
 
Coming from someone that grew up with not only my family having care of persons with disabilities, but a ton of families, this strikes me as being victim to not grasping that it's still a family life. I have a disability, so does my brother, so did the kids I grew up with, and so do the kids I help.

There are challenges but they are unique to the kid's needs. I'm doing very worthwhile work, stuff that few have ever considered doing, I'm happy. I think my life is worth living. My brother feels the same way about his. The kids I know feel the same way.

It's life. It always felt awkward trying to explain to someone else that my life or my brother's life wasn't so tragic so as to merit not ever have been experienced. That's mostly the non-disabled's twisted view of things.

If the person needs additional care, you plan for different situations. If my parents died young, we were to go with our Aunt. When I o became old enough, my sister and I entered the phase we are in now. When my folks pass on, we get him. We are certainly nervous about making the right calls for him, but we think of him as a centerpiece in our lives. He doesn't add a burden to us. He's our brother. He's a good guy, he does his job well, he makes everyone laugh.

Sounds like your brother is in good hands. :)
 
anti abortion positions are usually based on emotion, often involve men who are upset that they cannot control women or are formed by archaic and outdated religious views which are harmful to society. and society is in no way better off arresting a woman for aborting the fetus within her and punishing the doctor

No, the anti-abortion position is entirely consistent with reason and science.

The pro-abortion position is informed by ludicrous and delusional hatred, and often bizarre and extreme religious notions, as evidenced by the pro-aborts on this site who express the notion that killing is essential religious freedom, that killing is okay because reincarnation fixes everything, and that rape babies are spawn sent by the devil.

Again, **** society; individual rights are what matters.

But yes, individual human rights are well served by imprisoning those who kill innocent human beings in aggression so they can't hurt anyone else.
 
remind me how putting the mother of an aborted fetus in prison or forcing women into back alley abortions is good for society

No one "forces" a psycho bint to kill innocent human beings, be it legal or illegal, it's a homicide with malice aforethought, done deliberately and of one's own free will. A choice, yes, but a choice like the choice to rob a bank or rape.

But it is absolutely a good thing for such a human piece of **** to get such a greivous injury that she's sterilized or dead.
 
1) if you are consistent you have to oppose all abortion because the fetus is not responsible for how it was conceived

No ****.

2) if however, you are consistent, you are forced to support abominations like opposing abortion in cases of rape, incest

It is not an abomination to not support killing someone because of something their parents did. The abomination is yours for supporting such a thing.

3) and you have to tell us how society is better off jailing mothers who have abortions

I can see why women get so militant when they hear men telling them that abortion ought to be banned. Its a moronic position that only hurts society

Individual human rights are well served by aggressive and violent killers being locked up so they can't kill again. That's why we have governments in the first place.
 
Not at all. You can look at things any way you want.

Well that's certainly why or anyone else should avoid abandoning their kid, let alone killing them because they don't like how the genetic lottery turned out.

Eugenics is alive and well, I guess.
 
Oh I totally support freedom and I oppose laws that don't help society

remind me how putting the mother of an aborted fetus in prison or forcing women into back alley abortions is good for society

there's no such thing as a "mother of an aborted fetus"...


there's no sensible reason to imprison women who get abortions or drive them into "back alley abortions"... though there are sensible/reasonable restrictions on abortion.

I'm certainly no fan of abortion...but after reading this thread, i'm becoming more of a fan....I'm even becoming a fan of legally aborting people after they reach adulthood.
 
Back
Top Bottom